Truth is elusive in entertaining ‘Truth’ – Is ‘The Martian’ a go for launch at the Oscars?

15/10/2015

In this image released by Sony Pictures Classics, Robert Redford portrays Dan Rather in a scene from, ‘Truth’. (AP)

There’s a scene in “Truth,” James Vanderbilt’s crisp, absorbing new film about the doomed 2004 CBS story on then-president George W. Bush and his National Guard service, where execs are doing something utterly mundane. They’re looking at a calendar, scheduling a broadcast.

Between sports and fluffy specials, there aren’t many dates available for the potentially explosive “60 Minutes II” story. Unless, someone asks, it could be ready to air in just a few days? Producer Mary Mapes (Cate Blanchett, at her jittery, high-octane best), agrees, knowing how tough that’ll be, but up to the challenge. And we all shudder, because we know what happened. Maybe, if there had been more time for reporting, things would have been different?

Later, there’s a moment when a decision must be made within seconds, literally, about where to make a crucial cut. Again, we watch it happen, and we suck in our breath.

Movies about the craft of journalism – how the sausage gets made – aren’t always nail-biters. Credit goes to Vanderbilt (who also penned the script) and his cast – Blanchett, Robert Redford, and Stacy Keach especially – for making a cracklingly entertaining newsroom film about an endlessly thorny story, to say the least.

Not that everyone will find “Truth” perfect, or close. The film is based on one point of view: that of Mapes, who lost her job in the fallout and on whose own book the script is based. CBS does not fare well here. But Vanderbilt seems less interested in finding an ultimate answer – Mapes still maintains the story was accurate – than in the process of how these waters got so muddied. With the exception of Dan Rather, who anchored the fateful story, apologized for it and stepped down soon after, his characters are nearly all flawed. And with the exception of one eleventh-hour speech highly critical of Viacom, CBS’s parent company, the film largely avoids temptation to be too preachy.

We meet Mapes at the pinnacle of her career, acclaimed for reports like one on the abuse at Abu Ghraib. One day, a tip lands in her inbox. She assembles a crack research team to probe just how Bush got into the Texas National Guard in the first place — which kept him from Vietnam duty — and then whether he fulfilled the terms of his service.

Mapes’ report hinges in part on documents that would have come from an early 1970’s typewriter. The morning after the report, pride and congratulations are in the air. It doesn’t last. CBS is hit with claims that the memos were faked. Questions are raised about fonts and superscript. Mapes and her crew race to defend their reporting.

Documents

As everything spirals out of control, Mapes tries to point out that “the documents were a small part. They weren’t the whole story.” But nobody wants to hear that.

Two terrific speeches stand out. One is delivered for all it’s worth by Blanchett, who tells an investigating panel just how difficult and unlikely it would have been for someone to fake the documents. Another is heartbreaking. It comes just after a key source -Bill Burkett, played with great crustiness by Keach — has been put through the wringer on camera by a CBS team desperate to deflect blame. Burkett’s wife (Noni Hazelhurst) laces into the journalists for throwing her husband to the lions. It’s a searing moment.

Excellent

The acting is uniformly excellent. Most interesting is Redford. Without attempting to imitate, he captures Rather’s drawl and good-natured derring-do. It’s a hugely appealing performance, but whether the role itself is accurately drawn might be another question.

In the end, the film is a fascinating look at investigative broadcast journalism and how it intersected with election-year politics in one relentlessly slippery case. “Questions help reporters get to the truth,” Mapes tells her young son. At least in this case, the film seems to be saying, the very definition of “truth” is elusive.

Ridley Scott received some of the best reviews of his career for “The Martian.” The film performed at the box office. It’s popular with casual moviegoers (an “A” Cinemascore) and the industry (a capacity crowd at its official Academy screening). But is it a go for launch at the Oscars?

Some say yes for all the aforementioned reasons. But the film could just as easily be dismissed as a popcorn flick, relegated to craft categories. And even just two years removed from “Gravity,” there is the potential for genre bias against science-fiction. Not to mention, popular films fall out all the time; “Casino Royale” was an Academy screening hit, too, but — zero nominations.

If the film is more on-the-bubble than shoo-in, it could use some added rocket fuel. One option Fox is weighing is submitting it as a comedy/musical for Golden Globes consideration. Some might bristle at that, assuming comedies are somehow “lesser than.” Others think it fraudulent. “Trying to dominate the comedy category when you are really a drama afraid of dramatic competition is a punk move,” Judd Apatow wrote on Twitter when he caught wind of the idea. (His film “Trainwreck” with Amy Schumer is a comedy contender.)

But isn’t it valid? “The Martian” is funny. The tone is light throughout. It has a better case than other iffy submissions have had, certainly. “Punk move” or not, awards are partly a business of gaming the odds. While Matt Damon might struggle for a nod in the drama category, he could win in comedy. That kind of attention is a marketing boon.

Many other films are in the same boat, walking the tightrope between comedy and drama. “The Walk,” for instance, could go either way. But with its jaunty, spirited atmosphere, it’s currently tilting toward comedy, I’m told. “Trumbo,” meanwhile, paints a very serious Hollywood chapter with humorous overtones, but it, too, is leaning comedy.

A24 is still trying to decide the strategy for “The End of the Tour,” while Paramount’s late addition, “The Big Short” — about those who got rich off the housing crisis — could be quite formidable if deemed a comedy. (Agencies)